I'm the Detroit bureau chief for Forbes, which means I spend most of my time covering the automotive industry. But I also keep an eye on the rest of America's heartland—where stuff is manufactured and grown. I've been on the auto beat for more than 20 years at Forbes, Business Week and the Detroit Free Press. At the Boston Globe, I rode the tech bubble for a while, but I found there's nothing quite as fun as the auto beat. Whether you drive a car or not, everyone has an opinion about cars or car companies. What's yours?

Tesla's Gotcha Blog Catches New York Times Reporter Driving In Circles

Ford Motor’s Chief Executive Alan Mulally is fond of saying, “the data will set you free” when talking about business.

But another automotive CEO, Elon Musk, founder of Tesla Motors, has quite a different objective in mind.

He’s using data gleaned from one of his company’s high-tech, electric sedans to try to snare a New York Times reporter in a lie.

Musk and Times reporter John Broder have been engaged in a war of words since last Friday, when Broder published a damaging review of Tesla’s new Model S after an East Coast test-drive. Broder claimed he followed Tesla’s instructions, charging the vehicle at two newly installed super-charging facilities in Delaware and Connecticut, but still ran out of juice in the frigid weather, calling for a flatbed truck after the Tesla died.

Musk fought back on Twitter, calling the test a “fraud” and promised to show proof in an upcoming blog post.

At 2 a.m. this morning, he delivered a blow-by-blow critique of Broder’s test drive, complete with annotated charts that he said proved that Broder’s account was false. “When the facts didn’t suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts,” Musk wrote.

How does he know? “After a negative experience several years ago with ‘Top Gear,’ a popular automotive show, where they pretended that our car ran out of energy and had to be pushed back to the garage, we always carefully data log media drives,” Musk wrote.

So whether Broder knew it or not, the black box in the car he was testing had recorded every detail about his driving experience, and seemed to leave the journalist with some explaining to do.

For instance:

As the State of Charge log shows, the Model S battery never ran out of energy at any time, including when Broder called the flatbed truck.

Cruise control was never set to 54 mph as claimed in the article, nor did he limp along at 45 mph. Broder in fact drove at speeds from 65 mph to 81 mph for a majority of the trip and at an average cabin temperature setting of 72 F.

At the point in time that he claims to have turned the temperature down, he in fact turned the temperature up to 74 F.

Musk also wrote that once Broder reached the super-charging station in Connecticut with a display that said “0 miles remaining,” he drove in circles for over half a mile in a parking lot rather than plug it in. “When the Model S valiantly refused to die, he eventually plugged it in.”

Frankly, as an automotive reporter, I would have done the same thing. It’s important to know what happens when the battery eventually dies. If I were thinking about buying an electric car, I’d rather read about what to expect in a car review than to go through that anxiety myself on some deserted highway. It’s called reporting. UPDATE: In an email, Broder told New York magazine’s Daily Intelligencer: “I was circling the parking lot in the service plaza looking for the unmarked and unlighted Supercharger port in the dark. I was not trying to drain the battery.”

But Musk thinks the cards were stacked against Tesla from the beginning, based on earlier stories by Broder expressing skepticism about EVs.

“While the vast majority of journalists are honest, some believe the facts shouldn’t get in the way of a salacious story,” he wrote. “In Mr. Broder’s case, he simply did not accurately capture what happened and worked very hard to force our car to stop running.”

A Times spokeswoman today reiterated that its story was “fair and accurate,” adding, “We are in the process of reviewing the specific claims in Tesla’s blog post and will respond to those when that review is complete.

But in a post Tuesday responding to Musk’s tweets and other accusations he made in a CNBC interview, Broder defended his account as accurate.

He also said this, which is important:

“Virtually everyone says that I should have plugged in the car overnight in Connecticut, particularly given the cold temperature. But the test that Tesla offered was of the Supercharger, not of the Model S, which we already know is a much-praised car. This evaluation was intended to demonstrate its practicality as a “normal use,” no-compromise car, as Tesla markets it. Now that Tesla is striving to be a mass-market automaker, it cannot realistically expect all 20,000 buyers a year (the Model S sales goal) to be electric-car acolytes who will plug in at every Walmart stop.”

This is exactly the point I made in a Forbes post on Monday. Electric cars are not going to replace internal combustion cars any time soon. Despite the marvelous things the Tesla can do (which apparently includes spying on its operators) it is not a no-compromise car. Stopping for an hour to recharge the car’s battery is a compromise, let’s face it.

That doesn’t mean EVs don’t have a place. For people who don’t need to drive more than a hundred or so miles on a daily basis, and who have a place to plug in their car overnight, it may well be an excellent choice.

I am not an EV-hater. I care about sustainability. I worry about the environment. I don’t want our country to be dependent on foreign oil.

But until the price of electric vehicles falls dramatically and there is a national network of charging stations as prevalent and easy to access as today’s gas stations, electric cars will be nothing more than niche vehicles.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

I think the following comment is disingenuous, less than honest, and if true would display less sense than the average horse shows!

“Frankly, as an automotive reporter, I would have done the same thing. It’s important to know what happens when the battery eventually dies.”

I truthfully doubt that on a long distance test drive, in 10 – 30 degree F temperatures, without support staff, and within meters of a “free” charge someone “without the intention of being stranded” would drive around with the car showing a range of zero. I say this as someone who years ago experienced being stranded and as someone who has tried to push a vehicle by myself while also trying to steer the thing. Also don’t think Tesla technology would allow this.

Nothing Tesla says proves the reporter is lying. The reporter clearly states he didn’t fully charge the battery when he thought he had enough juice to make it to the next charging station. Cold weather appears to have played a factor in changing that assessment. Taking a side trip to show off the car to his brother and driving in circles in a parking lot should not be a game changer for this car. The battery computer log may not have shown the battery was completely drained but it still might not had enough juice to power the car. Tesla is handling this like a mother saying her child could never do anything wrong.

None of this is the point as far as the NYT is concerned. Yes, you should push the car until it dies, NO you shouldn’t lie about how it behaved or what you did to make it do the things it did. That’s plain old fashioned lying. Shame on Mr. Broder, and shame on you for acting as though what he did was just some sort of schoolyard prank. Hardly harmless, I’d say.

“Despite the marvelous things the Tesla can do (which apparently includes spying on its operators) it is not a no-compromise car”

Your message feel like you are been attacked (media) and you put personal feeling in the message against the company, a good journalist will stick to the facts.

Tesla is no spying customers, did you know before write that comment that customers can freely choose upload the data or not, Tesla is not spying customers, Tesla is collecting logs to keep improving the technology over time, customers can choose to be part of that experience or not.

In the case of the media, is totally reasonable that Tesla tracks what they do or they may change facts (like Broder did) to sell more news, in this case there is a Company reputation in the line and is unfair for fake articles to defame a company.

To the author- I have read both of your articles. You were biased in the first and are still biased even after the data has come out. Data is hard evidence. You now need to reconsider and admit that Broder did several things wrong and most likely was intentionally trying to make the battery die before reaching the destination. Or else the dude must be an idiot. But no, you say that this is reporting … better to read about what happens when the battery dies than to experience the anxiety yourself. But a report full of inaccuracies is of no help. Broder’s reporting was actually harmful to Tesla and I was so glad to hear that they had the data they needed for their defense. You, however, stated that Musk was using the data to try to snare reporters in a trap. Right. I don’t think he could be bothered. You also accused Tesla of spying on its operators. Not really. They only collect data with owner permission. But in the case of journalists, whose reporting has now more than once required verification, the black box is on all the time.

Here is the problem, this is not about you Joann and your blind desire to pat yourself on the back misses the point of this story. John Broder lied, that’s undisputed. No mistake, no misunderstanding, he lied to try and make a point (much like you admit to in my quote…and frankly that makes you just as bad if you’re going to call yourself a journalist) and when his point was proven false he lied. 2 year-olds do this, there isn’t really anything magical here it’s basic human nature that the majority of us outgrow from when we are 2 year-olds, he lied, got caught then tried to cover his lies with more lies, simple. He is a fraud and he should be fired period, nothing to try and justify and your attempt to do so says something very telling about your personality and ability to justify lying.